OMG GILLIGAN IS THE SN FORUM MEDIATOR!!!!!!!!!!!!

Jim must be proud!!! 'nough said. My point was that WE didn't did not elect you were appointed-- a democracy serves not dictates..... we are going down the wrong path. BUD5996 ( Southern National # 10 (1996))

Eric that would still be violating rule #1 because you just used a symbol instead. :p

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BUD Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jim must be proud!!! 'nough said. My point
> was that WE didn't did not elect you were
> appointed-- a democracy serves not dictates.....
> we are going down the wrong path. BUD5996 (
> Southern National # 10 (1996))

He didn't mention anything this past weekend... guess you could ask him yourself and let us know.

John K was overseas and NO ONE else was willing to do it. I'm sorry I stepped in and helped sticky tournaments, post results, developed a template that saves TD's and admins a ton of time, created the Off Topic section for people to use without people complaining about things "polluting" the general section, also created another hidden section for admins to keep track of spammers and other things that would have other wised disappeared... all the while barely EVER moving or editing a single post that wasn't requested by the original poster and creating the "need at least 3 board members to move or edit a post" policy that we have today. Sorry I did all that. I still RARELY edit a post now that Leslie is around to do it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

QuoteEric Day
Dang it to heck, I'll be figure'n this thang out sum day lol

Luckily spelling and grammar wasn't made a rule either. ;)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I will say in regards to sarcastic comments. If it is pointed towards friends, then it is taken as fun banter, ie Gilligan and Eric above. However when sarcasm is pointed at someone that has already stated they don't like you it is taken a completely different way. In that case you are egging on that person and a crapfest of useless back and forth posts usually ensues. I don't necessarily see it as having a sense of humor as much as antagonizing another person......

I'd concede that point John K but I noticed he came back about 2 weeks ago... I hadn't said one word to him or about him until he asked a question that I was the best person to answer it. My response was a very professional and polite PM that stuck with just the facts of the situation. If I really wanted to antagonize the man then I would have started LONG before that. I really have not desire to do so. I was happy that it seemed like Bernie was back and behaving himself.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree Mike, way too long. I think before they started enforcing rules such as banning etc, there should have been clear and concise punishments that follow the guidelines posted. I am not saying I disagree with said guidelines, I think that those types of things are needed, but to warn someone, then enact punishment is a little unfair. How do I know for instance that what I say, if said in the wrong way and somebody finds it offensive, will net me a 90 day ban, arbitrarily.

All this bickering is doing is further dividing what could be a great thing for the region.

Suggestion:

1st offense: private warning, post is edited to remove the offensive matter.
2nd offense: public and private warning. Clear expectation of punishment for future offenses outlined in the public warning. post is edited to remove the offensive matter.
3rd offense: 1 week suspension from the forum
4th offense: 2 month suspension from the forum
5th offense and beyond: banning from forum and/or banning from events for a month, depending on the severity of the offense.

Lets work together to be civil in our discourse and get some solutions at hand. I think that whatever point the BoD wanted to make, has been made, but they need to revisit the situation and the punishment system to really make the punishment fit the crime. In this case, I agree, "cruel and unusual."

Most of the people I have spoken with think 30 days is fair for a 1st infraction, 90 days for a 2nd, and 1 year for a 3rd.

Heck what do we know, we are just the players. We don't have a voice in the suspensions.

I do believe a rules violation in a tournament deserves a more harsh punishment than typing a curse word on a website. Not being able to attend a SNC could be or could not be a big deal. If the SNC is in Mobile and the player is from Mobile than that is a good punishment, but if same SNC is in Mobile and the player is from Memphis how big of a punishment is it.

QuoteKeith
Most of the people I have spoken with think 30 days is fair for a 1st infraction, 90 days for a 2nd, and 1 year for a 3rd.

Thank goodness we aren't that strict!

1st infraction is only a warning... I think our 3rd infraction is only 6 months. So we are much more lenient than they are. *whew*

Dustin, I say this absolutely no ill intent towards your words... but that suggestion of lengths is a joke. It wouldn't be until they trampled all over the forum willingly 4 times before any sort of real punishment would be doled out. I think that is expecting a little too much from those that have no concern over the forum.

Also, if you find yourself getting a warning then obviously you should evaluate what language you choose and be careful... the warning will expire at some point so you just have to mind your p's and q's for a while. But if you were to approach us and ask "can I say _____" and we say "absolutely not" and you then and post that word with in a half our of reading our reply... I think that is a different scenario than "accidentally" crossing the line. Hell, everyone wants reduced sentences but in reality if a person purposefully breaks a law and clearly states this to the judge it is unlikely that the judge will reduce the sentence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I take offense to this post by GIlligan . It has profanity in it. You know the H E double toothpick word. No worse then Mike's use of the other word for mule. I now ask that a warning be sent to Gilligan for his use of profanity on this site. 2nd offense today.

JABBA

Gilligan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Most of the people I have spoken with think 30
> days is fair for a 1st infraction, 90 days for a
> 2nd, and 1 year for a 3rd.
>
>
> Thank goodness we aren't that strict!
>
> 1st infraction is only a warning... I think our
> 3rd infraction is only 6 months. So we are much
> more lenient than they are. *whew*
>
> Dustin, I say this absolutely no ill intent
> towards your words... but that suggestion of
> lengths is a joke. It wouldn't be until they
> trampled all over the forum willingly 4 times
> before any sort of real punishment would be doled
> out. I think that is expecting a little too much
> from those that have no concern over the forum.
>
> Also, if you find yourself getting a warning then
> obviously you should evaluate what language you
> choose and be careful... the warning will expire
> at some point so you just have to mind your p's
> and q's for a while. But if you were to approach
> us and ask "can I say _____" and we say
> "absolutely not" and you then and post that word
> with in a half our of reading our reply... I think
> that is a different scenario than "accidentally"
> crossing the line. Hell, everyone wants reduced
> sentences but in reality if a person purposefully
> breaks a law and clearly states this to the judge
> it is unlikely that the judge will reduce the
> sentence.

Everyone has different guidelines... some harsher than ours some lighter... as you say... it is what it is.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gilligan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> but in reality if a person purposefully
> breaks a law and clearly states this to the judge
> it is unlikely that the judge will reduce the
> sentence.

So, if I were to be fined for libel after being warned to not do it, but didn't know how much the fine was going to be, I couldn't get that fine reduced on claim of ignorance?! That's asinine!

Jabba, I addressed this concern in your other post that this was copy and pasted from.

Again, thanks for your concern in cleaning up this forum.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

All of this would be a non-issue if their would have been guidelines setup upon creation of this forum like most forums do. Then even if they were harsher there would be very little discussion going on about it.

Look at the pdga... from what I understand you can't even disagree with them without getting pretty harsh bans. I don't know because you aren't even allowed to speak there unless you pony up for a membership... talk about FREEdom of speech!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First of all, as a club, freedom of speech does not apply. Rules can be made that discriminate because of the private nature of the club. IE. You pay dues in the form of tournament fees, etc. While not perfect I believe it falls into that category. Therefore while I highly respect the claims for freedom of speech as afforded by the constitution, it doesn't necessarily apply in this case.

Second, I don't think that "reduced sentences" have a lessor effect or are a joke is *edited*. What I see going on is a request for civil discourse and an attempt to regulate what has severely gotten out of hand. In my mind, as I've posted previously in another thread, by holding the SN BoD accountable for getting serious changes in hand will have a spill-over effect to the forums. The least priority should be forum moderation.

Does the forum need moderation? Yes, insert a list of words into your filter system if needed and they are automatically removed. But if you are seriously going to make an issue about personal accountability, then please get the ball moving on the serious issues that plague the SN. What about including some sort of "admission of guilt and public apology considerations to allow reinstatement?" I've scoured the forums and I've seen more and more that call into question how things operate for this organization.

Chalk it up to explosive growth, sure ok, but make the changes. If you have to, hire a CPA to manage the books, and charge an extra $2 in SN fees at the tournament. Whatever you have to do, but the anger spilling over from these issues is what is causing all the rancor in the forums.

You lead by example. I understand that this is volunteer run, but as an organization, there needs to be a rock solid foundation for an example.

Thanks for all the hard work BoD, no sarcasm at all. Volunteering is hard and we all have personal lives that need tending to, but it shouldn't take over 4 months to identify rules for a forum, while serious financial allegations have been raised, with no answer. Again, not trying to beat a dead horse, but the more I read, the more concerned I am about this.

I find it kind of strange that the BOD voted to do this 6-0 and only 3 BOD members are here defending their decision. Where are the other 3 members? Are we sure they did vote for the ban? (sarcastic) Are we sure they did vote for the penalties? (sarcastic) I know just last month the same 3 members on here defending the decision made for banning, could not get in touch with the other 3 to decide if a Tournament could be sanctioned for a round of 14 holes. All I am saying if you are going to vote for or against something you should be able to discuss you reasoning for your vote.

Thanks to Justin, Leslie, and Kevin for at least making a stand for their point of view.

Some of the members may not have a job that enables them to have access during the day. I'm fortunate enough to have several periods throughout the day with which I can sit at a desk and check on everything going on here. I assure you that if the minutes read that the vote was 6-0, then we had 6 members at the meeting. I really can't answer for the other 3 right now, but I know that they were at the meeting.

Keith you actually touched upon what I was going to mention to Dustin.

Dustin, those few months you speak of were also during the turkey day and xmas/new years holidays... we didn't meet as often as we normally would have during those months.

I don't disagree that things need to be fixed but we did change some things. If you look at the minutes you will see that Leslie is now in charge of keeping track of bag tag money from here on out. This was the main source of complaints of the nature in which you speak. I don't disagree with much else you had to say about how things should be done and if need be we should spend the money to get it done. But I am only one person.

We are working and moving towards making things a WHOLE lot more transparent than they have ever been... and that is ZERO slight towards any previous boards or treasures... we just didn't have as much need back then due to our size I'm guessing. I'd have to say this board is taking on a whole lot more issues and pushing through them than the previous year did (that is the only one I was some what involved with.) We are given a topic and we work our hardest to get it answered or at least addressed. Again we only have so much time at a meeting and what might be a higher priority to one might not be to another. We have had a board member(s) calling for a complete shut down of the forums because they felt it was so bad.

I don't disagree that our priorities might not be where you think they should be or even the majority... but we get our sample of what we think the public wants us to handle and we tackle it as we can.

Though one thing you said didn't sit well with me... you stated:

Quotebut the anger spilling over from these issues is what is causing all the rancor in the forums.

Though I may not disagree that these may be the reasons that there are upset people, and in their minds (which is all that truly matters to an individual) rightfully so. BUT, that does not excuse anyone and certainly doesn't justify anyone from willfully and purposefully breaking rules... that statement doesn't really coincide with discontent for accounting issues.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take me to the window and understand
I got a rocking chair in my skin.
And every time the wind blows
It brings me down to meet the mood I'm in.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------